Here is one for the multi-engine planes. Devise and implement a microprocessor based system that would sync multi-engines on the plane and keep them sync'ed. If one of the engines on a four engine died, the system would balance by killing the corresponding engine on the other side. If on a twin, one engine died, the system would kill the other before the snap to death. There are other cases that could be handled by the processor but here is some to get started.
> This post is an inquiry to see what kinds of gadgets the rc modeling
> community might find interesting or beneficial.
> A couple of friends and I are engineers tired of working for someone
> else and are evaluating whether creating items for this hobby might
> be a good area for us to venture into. I doubt we'll spend any energy
> on battery technologies as we aren't really equipped for that.
> What would interest you if it were available?
> Flight dataloggers?
> Real-time telemetry (engine temp, rpm, altitude, fuel guage)?
> Video transmission?
> Frequency scanner to see if anyone is using your channel?
Unless I am having a senior moment and do not remember correctly..Jomar has a unit that does that...or the fellow that did the original designsJomar bought out..did have a circuit that did exactly what you want...Some back issues of RCM would have it and I cannot for the life of me remember what the man'sname was that designed that and other neat gadgets.. Frank Schwartz slightly dazed in Hendersonville, TN
I thought these products were on the market already:
Flight dataloggers? Real-time telemetry (engine temp, rpm, altitude, fuel gage)? Video transmission? Frequency scanner to see if anyone is using your channel?
So are you interested in something that isn't available now. How about a variable speed prop for glow and gas? (that's a challenge) How about an automatic engine mixture control to prevent over lean or over rich flights? A true inertial guidance system with programmable maneuvers?
Yikes! You mean shut off the carrier? What'll the Rx do when it sees no carrier? Seems like you'd need a mated fail-safe Rx for such a setup. Much as i hate to agree with D.H. on anything, a dedicated RC-band spectrum analyzer would be one of the handiest possible gadgets for the field. Bill(oc)
So, you turn in the frequency pin. Whip out the spray, hose your baby down, and break out the towels. Got her all cleaned up and packed away, so you grab your transmitter as someone is taxiing his quarter scale out of the pits. Care to guess what happens next?
What is the use of the turn it back on portion of the equation? I can see the auto turn off feature as a great idea.
IMHO, the RC control system has evolved the wrong way; all the clever bits are in the transmitter, they belong in the aircraft.
The gadget would look like this. On one side of the gadget there is a set of sockets that plug directly into the servo pins of the receiver. The opposite side of the gadget has a set of pins into which the servos are connected. In effect it intercepts the channels, adds value to the control system.
OK, the user can now do mixing in the aircraft, so what? Here's the business case:
With current technology, the RC buying public are accustomed to paying top dollar for fancy transmitters. Its accepted that if you want to do fancy mixing, have lots of model memories, or just impress ones buddies, you get a top end radio. The flight computer can change all that. You can buy a cheap gadget (compared to the premium of a top radio) and use it with a low to mid range radio. Don't worry about how many memories it has, get one for each plane. Want a fail safe setting, no need to go PCM, the flight computer on a PPM Rx can be programmed to take care of signal loss situations. Its time to adjust the mixer settings: no cryptic 2 line LCD display to navigate, the flight computer is USBed to a commodity PC for a full screen GUI novice friendly mixer program. Need to drive 14 servos and the up-link is limited to six channels: the flight computer can compute additional controls from the available primary channels.
How about data logging, no problem, the USB port on the gadget can double as a data dump for optional on board inputs. Even without additional sensors, it could count glitches, monitor battery voltage, monitor servo current draw.
More than one mix for different flight modes. Use the non proportional channels as a binary mode selector (00 = landing and take off, 01 = tame settings, 11 = high rates, 10 = inverted). Program the flight computer with different control responses in each mode.
Put the flight computer into the control loop. Hook up a gyro and get the computer to maintain height, direction, speed, etc in a nominated mode. Hook up GPS, and get the computer to fly way points.
There's a potential market out there for folks who are adverse to expensive transmitters and/or would like to dabble with computer control of their models.
killing the corresponding engine on the other side. If on a twin, one engine died, the system would kill the other before the snap to death.
Or, maybe the system could crank in enough control surface correction to maintain stable flight. That could be programmed to occur faster than a thumb might react and not only avoid the snap of death, but the controlled crash dead stick landing.
| In article , | firstname.lastname@example.org says... | > How about a device to go in your transmitter that would shut it down if the | > sticks were not moved in a certain time (programmable). It would turn on | > again as soon as a stick was moved. | >
| So, you turn in the frequency pin. Whip out the spray, hose your baby | down, and break out the towels. Got her all cleaned up and packed away, | so you grab your transmitter as someone is taxiing his quarter scale out | of the pits. Care to guess what happens next?
Pretty much the same thing that may have happened if your radio didn't have a auto turn off feature. As long as the pilot's signal is stronger than your signal, his plane has a good chance of not going out of control. But the reletive strengths could certainly change mid-flight ...
| What is the use of the turn it back on portion of the equation? I can | see the auto turn off feature as a great idea.
One fun-fly contest idea is to see who can fly their plane the longest without touching any controls at all. And glider pilots know to trim their planes properly and not touch anything when looking for thermals. It could be very bad for your transmitter to just turn itself off during a flight.
Though a long enough delay (15-30 minutes?) would probably alleviate those concerns.
To be fair though, this isn't a good idea for a gadget to add onto a transmitter. Instead, it's a good idea for a feature to add to a transmitter when you're building it.